Re: tesla coil power ?! (fwd)

["High Voltage list" <hvlist@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: Steven Roys <sroys@xxxxxxxxxx>



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 17:30:57 +1200
From: m.j.watts@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To: High Voltage list <hvlist@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: tesla coil power ?! (fwd)

On 27 Sep 2007, at 18:29, High Voltage list wrote:

Date sent:      	Thu, 27 Sep 2007 18:29:44 -0600 (MDT)
From:           	"High Voltage list" <hvlist@xxxxxxxxxx>
To:             	hvlist <hvlist@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:        	Re: tesla coil power ?! (fwd)
Forwarded by:   	hvlist@xxxxxxxxxx
Date forwarded: 	Thu, 27 Sep 2007 18:29:45 -0600 (MDT)

> Original poster: Steven Roys <sroys@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> 
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 13:12:35 +0100
> From: Chris Swinson <list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: High Voltage list <hvlist@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: tesla coil power ?! (fwd)
> 
> Hi Malcolm,
> 
> 
> > How were they positioned relative to the transmitting coil? Equally spaced 
> > around
> > it?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >You can demonstrate the effects of directors such as you find on yagi
> > antennae by placing receiving coils in a line. I did that using a metal 
> > bench as a
> > ground plane (a long time ago).
> 
> You can't place them in a line as such, the coils in effect screen the 
> transmission power. A little bit more complex than that but thats the idea.

You can and I used to do it regularly. You only "screen" the transmitter if the 
intervening coils suffer losses (e.g. sparks).
 
> > Have you measured the actual input and output power of your transmitter or 
> > are
> > you going on transformer faceplate ratings? Beware of non-sinusoidal 
> > waveforms
> > messing up readings on multimeters.
> 
> The transformers are current limited. If I could draw more wattage from them 
> I could have used a larger tank cap for short runs.

Current limiting is usually inductive which then gives rise to resonant cap 
charging. Resistive current-limiting rules don't count. Inductors store energy.
 
Malcolm 
 
> > Some real measurements will show where the truth lies. Using the 
> > brilliance of
> > lightbulbs as a measure is a rather dubious proposition. It is a very 
> > popular
> > technique on Keelynet-type expts.
> 
> 
> I keep telling people I charged up capacitors on DC and calculated the rate 
> of charge over 20 seconds. Lamps are good for a "first order" indication. I 
> was not happy with just lamps, which is why I spent a fortune on special 
> diodes and worked on regular DC levels.
> 
> 
> > These are quite common little demonstrations of e.m. coupling. Recently 
> > some
> > prof somewhere hit the headlines with a suggestion that HF RF could be use 
> > to
> > wirelessly charge cellphone batteries etc. as though it were something 
> > new. I
> > guess he forgot or never knew about Tesla. It was all near-field stuff as 
> > in fact my
> > use of a local radio station to power a bank of LEDs in my study is.
> 
> 
> Exactly, makes me stick really, There was a post about a group of people who 
> transmitted 60watts over 2 meters, big deal, I did 300watts 15 years ago, 
> Tesla did did it way before anyone else. People should do a litlte homework 
> before hand!
> 
> >>
> >> If the transmitter is not coupled and has all these losses, then the
> >> transmitter is not being loaded ? if so it would mean we could obtain
> >> 100watts almost unlimited times ?!
> >
> > Does that seem reasonable? An unloaded (uncoupled-to-load) transmitter 
> > should
> > have few losses shouldn't it?
> >
> 
> 
> Not the transmitter, the losses are over the distance but its only voltage, 
> its not really that important. It is the same as if you had a 1:1 isolation 
> transformer, seperate the primary & secodary coils,  what happens ? the 
> coupling drops, the power on the secondary drops, but thing is, if you can 
> only obtain a few mA from the secondary then really it can't load the 
> primary in any way, its just to far away!  Of course its as simple as I can 
> tell it, may not necessarly be a working example.
> 
> 
> >> All being said and done, that's all the facts and figures in a "overview"
> >> kind of way.  Figures are the best I can come up with to fit the results.
> >> They could be totally wrong though even so I can light up 300watts worth 
> >> of
> >> lamps form my tesla coil. The interesting test would have been to add 3 
> >> more
> >> coils, but something I just could not do unfortunately. So reason why I
> >> posted my results to see if anyone else had done anything interesting 
> >> along
> >> these lines before ?
> >
> > I think you should arrange things so you can take the expt. further. It 
> > hardly
> > seems a satisfactory conclusion is reached when stopping at this point.
> 
> 
> I stopped at this point 10 years ago, its why I am talking about it now as I 
> just can't continue this work easily on my own. Annoying as it may be, what 
> choice do I have ? I am trying to build a tesla coil working on low voltage 
> and using high Q coils and obtaining the step-up via pc/sc ratios, though 
> its slow going :-(
> 
> Its a side step direction really. trying to build a cheap solid state 
> system. the DRSSTC will probably be my next attempt if I can't get my own to 
> work. Even so, will not be until next year.
> 
> Really all I need is a better spark gap driven coil, they do make solid 
> state spark gaps now, cost a fortune, good tank cap and good transformer and 
> should obtain much better results. Though I will never be able to afford to 
> build it. again its why I am trying to get people to understand my results 
> as one day someone may be able to make use of my results. Nobout it will end 
> up in the OU archives as unfinished or unproven OU devices, though unless I 
> win the lotto then that's where it will have to stay.
> 
> I am going to build a very small proof of concept device soon, will document 
> it and video it and host everything on my site for a while. Hopefully it 
> will spark some interest, pardon the pun!
> 
> I am trying to obtain funds for the final build, though I doubt anyone will 
> take the project serious, so not holding out on hopes. To be honest, All 
> this work was done years ago, I just want the device to be proven OU or not 
> OU, really don't care which after all this time. Though I hate unfinished 
> things, but as I can't hardly put food in the table, building devices is 
> just not going to happen anytime soon. Its the reason I am trying to tell 
> everyone about my results. Some may agree, some may flame me, I really don't 
> care. My findings are published on various groups and WebPages so maybe 
> eventually in time the truth will be known.
> 
> Chris
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > Malcolm
> >
> >
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>